Yet another mostly anti-Amazon article in the New Yorker

[bgalbrecht]

Cheap Words
Amazon is good for customers. But is it good for books?
by George Packer

TL;DNR summary, pretty much not, that Amazon doesn't really care about books, they're just a stepping stone for Bezos to turn Amazon into the Everything Store, the replacement for Wal-Mart for customers at all price points.

I'm not a big Amazon fan, although I am a customer. I'm probably cynical, but I really wonder whether the people at the top of large bookstore chains, like Borders, B&N, Books-a-Million, all started out as book lovers, and the pressures of business force them to look at books as commodities also.

For what it's worth, for a company that doesn't care about books, Amazon has done far more than almost any company at making books, in print or out of print, available to the masses. Maybe it's just good business, but they certainly made it easier for people to buy the harder to find books, often at very good prices.

[crich70]

I've bought a few books through Amazon where I paid more in the s/h costs than I did for the book itself so I have to agree with you that they do make it easier for the customer to find/get books.Whether it's because they care about books or it's just good business they do get the job done.

[forsooth]

I envy those who shop "easily" at Amazon.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by bgalbrecht

Cheap Words
Amazon is good for customers. But is it good for books?
by George Packer

...
I'm not a big Amazon fan, although I am a customer. I'm probably cynical, but I really wonder whether the people at the top of large bookstore chains, like Borders, B&N, Books-a-Million, all started out as book lovers, and the pressures of business force them to look at books as commodities also.
...

That probably isn't the case in the big chains, or at the very top of the publishing food chain, but probably is for the people doing the real work in both areas. I would guess that the NY book elite types probably have a certain disdain for Amazon.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

I would guess that the NY book elite types probably have a certain disdain for Amazon.

Ya think?


It's the old elitist snobbery at work.
Same as when paperbacks first appeared and when paperback originals appeared or when TV took over. Lots of snide remarks and gloom and doom hand-wringing.

This time, of course, they are ascribing all the "evils" of the new age to one company instead of spreading the hate around. Amazon sells books cheap, they help used pbooks find new readers, they enabled an actual ebook industry to bloom, and (worst of all) they provide a level playing field for indie publishers of all stripes; from small presses to hybrid authors to newbie author/publishers.

People who have a vested interest in the ancien regime are (only now) starting to realize that ebooks are not a fad, after all, and that the ripples are rocking the row boat just a little too strongly for their taste.

[jersysman]

So is this going to be the new strategy? Admit that Amazon is great for customers, but not good for books? That is a crazy assumption. Even before I got into ebooks, Amazon was a place for me to go and get great prices on used pbooks and even hardcovers. Why is it so bad for books to get them into the hands of readers (and previous pbook hoarders such as myself) and a reasonable price?

[fjtorres]

Well, they have to do *something* to delegitimize the new age before things get out of hand. Put an end to things like small presses growing instead of selling out to giant multinationals, authors taking books to readers without giving up control of their copyright, readers getting to read what they like as often as they like, niche authors actually making a middle class living out of storytelling...

This, for example, is their greatest fear:
http://moirarogers.com/2013/12/the-m...quiet-success/

This is not a post telling you that you should self-publish. I don’t know you, and therefore I don’t know if you should self-publish. I don’t know if you like details. I don’t know if you are obsessed with knowing every part of the publishing process, if you have experience selling & marketing ebooks, if you understand all the different devices, ebook formats and retailers. I don’t know if you’ve got skills that will make the process run more smoothly, like experience in cover design or editing or book design. I don’t know if you could whip up an HTML template in your sleep, or if you’d have to pay someone to do all the stuff I do for myself, thus increasing your risk.

I don’t know your goals. I don’t know if validation matters, or if you only have time to steal a few hours every night to write and can’t stand to sacrifice those to the tedious details of being a publisher. I don’t know if your only dream is a New York editor working with you to create a mass market copy of your words, and nothing else will make you happy. I don’t know if you’re writing a genre that is hard to move in ebooks. I don’t know if you know how to answer that question yourself.

I don’t know you. And since I don’t know you, it would be reckless for me to give you advice based on my skills, my goals, my dreams and my experience.

But I know myself, and the facts of my career. That is the most useful thing I can offer.

Fact: We have never signed a contract with any of the Big Six/Five publishers.

Fact: We have never hit the USA Today or New York Times bestseller lists.

Fact: We split just over $100,000 in 2012, and our money was divided pretty evenly between books published by a digital first publisher (mostly Samhain Publishing) and books we self-published on our own.

Fact: We’ll each make that in 2013, which is our fifth year as published authors.

Two authors under a shared pen name, making $50k a year each, selling short stories in ebook form? Growing to $100k each? No agent, no NYC glass tower gatekeeper, no NY press reviews?

Heresy!

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Put an end to things like small presses growing instead of selling out to giant multinationals

Why would anyone need an actual physical printing press to publish books any more? Or has the word "Press" expanded its meaning while I wasn't looking?

[xg4bx]

How dare these heretics at Amazon bring literature to the unwashed plebeians; literature should only be a pursuit of the idle rich and esteemed literati.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Why would anyone need an actual physical printing press to publish books any more? Or has the word "Press" expanded its meaning while I wasn't looking?

The latter.
Small press = low volume publishing houses. Lately it also includes digital first and even digital only.
A lot of them are actually new startups rather than remnants of the old days. And many don't actually own presses, they just contract small lots to China companies. Which is also a path for author/publishers with enough of a following to go beyond current POD.

[HarryT]

Thanks - hadn't come across that meaning of the word.

[Ninjalawyer]

I think the last paragraph of the article was my favourite:

At the moment, those people are obsessed with how they read books—whether it’s on a Kindle or an iPad or on printed pages. This conversation, though important, takes place in the shallows and misses the deeper currents that, in the digital age, are pushing American culture under the control of ever fewer and more powerful corporations. Bezos is right: gatekeepers are inherently élitist, and some of them have been weakened, in no small part, because of their complacency and short-term thinking. But gatekeepers are also barriers against the complete commercialization of ideas, allowing new talent the time to develop and learn to tell difficult truths. When the last gatekeeper but one is gone, will Amazon care whether a book is any good?

The traditional publishers have been the driving force behind commercializing ideas and wringing any life or creativity or originality out of a work for the most part. Pretending that traditional publishers are some kind of noble defenders of true literature and art is bizarre.

It's too bad that Amazon doesn't give people a way to tell if the content of a book is any good, some sort of rating or public review process maybe?

[ElspethB]

Decided the article was too long to read on my computer screen so I've sent it to my Kindle.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Ninjalawyer

Pretending that traditional publishers are some kind of noble defenders of true literature and art is bizarre.

They do it for sound commercial reasons, not to be noble, but there is a great deal of truth in the idea that traditional publishers have a valuable role as gatekeepers. That's why I buy almost all my books from traditional publishers rather than independent authors.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by HarryT

They do it for sound commercial reasons, not to be noble, but there is a great deal of truth in the idea that traditional publishers have a valuable role as gatekeepers. That's why I buy almost all my books from traditional publishers rather than independent authors.

Yes, but without them, do you not think you would easily adapt? You would still have your favorite authors, you would still have the classics, and you would still have an active word-of-mouth (and online review/recommendation) system that anyone new and noteworthy would surely still bubble up through to get your attention. People will always hype what they think are good books... whether it's readers or publishers doing so.

People buy from traditional publishers because they have always bought from traditional publishers.